There will always be muppets who haven't seen the previous videos and know nothing their dismal hit rate, who will come in wide-eyed with wonder and happily drink up something that shits upon the show they dislike.
The bias of Midnights Edge....
- Thread starter Infern0
- Start date
It's like an alcoholic leaning up against a light pole, they aren't there for illumination but for support.
The funniest thing ME did was a “round table review” that was just a bunch of them literally screaming into the mics. Not exaggerating, they screamed like little babies that had their lollipops taken away. It was quite sad.
I think their richest claim of all the videos is the conceit that Netflix is upset with CBS because... Discovery is “not true to Prime canon”. Netflix is apparently unhappy that CBS is not adhering to canon... like Netflix actually gives a fuck about Trek canon.
The aroma of their bullshit is pretty potent.
I think their richest claim of all the videos is the conceit that Netflix is upset with CBS because... Discovery is “not true to Prime canon”. Netflix is apparently unhappy that CBS is not adhering to canon... like Netflix actually gives a fuck about Trek canon.
The aroma of their bullshit is pretty potent.
Nerd entitlement is just pathetic and I’m just tired of how YouTube’s algorithm keeps recommending me click bait garbage of how Star Trek and Star Wars have been ruined because they made new ones. It’s all pretty much, this messes up my headcanon, therefore it’s terrible. Then somehow turns into rants about SJWs, Mary Sues, how feminism is cancer and other bullshit that appeals to whiny manchildren who go on to harass the cast and crew online for not catering to their delusions and expectations.
Speaking of Youtube, I had a bit of an epiphany a while back. I was watching some old Siskel and Ebert shows, and I noticed something funny with Gene's reviews of the late 80s Bonds.
For TLD, his biggest gripe was that they chose Dalton over Brosnan. Then for LTK, he didn't like the drug plot and wished they had gone with something more "classic." And then for Goldeneye, he said he didn't like Brosnan and thought the plot felt too much like an old Bond.
So here I am watching clips from an old syndicated TV show on Youtube that was the perfect microcosm of modern fandom Youtube videos.
For TLD, his biggest gripe was that they chose Dalton over Brosnan. Then for LTK, he didn't like the drug plot and wished they had gone with something more "classic." And then for Goldeneye, he said he didn't like Brosnan and thought the plot felt too much like an old Bond.
So here I am watching clips from an old syndicated TV show on Youtube that was the perfect microcosm of modern fandom Youtube videos.
The Golden Rule when it comes to trashing something: Always take the opposite position of whatever it is you're reviewing or discussing.
Good GOD, then don't go anywhere near reading the posts from the AXANAR vid's.
You'll be ruined for life!
I'd sooner jump off a bridge and I even know Alec Peters through a fan group.Good GOD, then don't go anywhere near reading the posts from the AXANAR vid's.
You'll be ruined for life!
Ha! Yeah, Siskel was pretty heavily biased against anyone as Bond not played by Connery, though I think he did give OCTOPUSSY a thumbs up. I can’t blame him on not being enamored with Brosnan, as he started off pretty weak. His summary being that he looked more like Bond’s chauffeur than Bond is spot on, especially when he had the poofy Remington Steele hair. Wasn’t until DIE ANOTHER DAY that it felt like he was in charge of the role, but it’s the movie most fans hate.
Similar threads
- Locked
